[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Reply to: [list | sender only]
Re: [ddlm-group] Relationship asmong CIF2, STAR,CIF1 and Python. . . .. .
- To: Group finalising DDLm and associated dictionaries <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: [ddlm-group] Relationship asmong CIF2, STAR,CIF1 and Python. . . .. .
- From: "Herbert J. Bernstein" <[email protected]>
- Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 05:47:20 -0500 (EST)
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
- References: <[email protected]><8F77913624F7524AACD2A92EAF3BFA54166D7D1EB8@SJMEMXMBS11.stjude.sjcrh.local><[email protected]><[email protected]><[email protected]><[email protected]><[email protected]><8F77913624F7524AACD2A92EAF3BFA54166D7D1EBB@SJMEMXMBS11.stjude.sjcrh.local><[email protected]><8F77913624F7524AACD2A92EAF3BFA54166D7D1EBE@SJMEMXMBS11.stjude.sjcrh.local><[email protected]><[email protected]><[email protected]><[email protected]><[email protected]>
I respectfully disagree, but I will refrain from arguing
this particular point until we settle our goals, as which
point I suspect this discussion will become moot.
-- Herbert
=====================================================
Herbert J. Bernstein, Professor of Computer Science
Dowling College, Kramer Science Center, KSC 121
Idle Hour Blvd, Oakdale, NY, 11769
+1-631-244-3035
[email protected]
=====================================================
On Tue, 18 Jan 2011, James Hester wrote:
> Herbert asserts that the "process" of manipulating strings in a dREL
> method would be simpler and less error-prone if dREL string types and
> CIF "datavalue types" are strongly related.
>
> Strings originating from a CIF data file would already be in some
> uniform internal representation when they reach the dREL method, so
> the particular syntax that was used to input those strings is entirely
> irrelevant. Likewise, the dREL parser has already converted any
> string literals in the dREL method into the same internal
> representation. So there is no need for any "cross-translation"
> whatsoever.
>
> On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 12:35 AM, Herbert J. Bernstein
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Dear James,
>>
>> �But the entire point of the dREL method is to
>> generate strings to compare with or insert among
>> CIF data values, and that process is simplest
>> and least error prone if the repetoire of dREL
>> string types and of CIF data value types are
>> strongly related with a simple cross translation.
>>
>> �Regards,
>> � �Herbert
>>
>> =====================================================
>> �Herbert J. Bernstein, Professor of Computer Science
>> � Dowling College, Kramer Science Center, KSC 121
>> � � � �Idle Hour Blvd, Oakdale, NY, 11769
>>
>> � � � � � � � � +1-631-244-3035
>> � � � � � � � � [email protected]
>> =====================================================
>>
>> On Sat, 15 Jan 2011, James Hester wrote:
>>
>>> dREL strings and elides have nothing to do with CIF2 syntax. �They are
>>> dREL syntax. �A dREL method is just an ordinary string for the CIF2
>>> parser, and has no special status.
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Herbert J. Bernstein
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear James,
>>>>
>>>> �Please reread the dREL string quoting specifications.
>>>> Please reread the dREL conventions on elides. �Let's
>>>> settle whether and in what way those items should
>>>> remain in the language.
>>>>
>>>> �Regards,
>>>> � �Herbert
>>>>
>>>> =====================================================
>>>> �Herbert J. Bernstein, Professor of Computer Science
>>>> � Dowling College, Kramer Science Center, KSC 121
>>>> � � � �Idle Hour Blvd, Oakdale, NY, 11769
>>>>
>>>> � � � � � � � � +1-631-244-3035
>>>> � � � � � � � � [email protected]
>>>> =====================================================
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, 15 Jan 2011, James Hester wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I welcome such analysis, which I believe is likely to lead to no more
>>>>> than a list of useful editorial changes to DDLm related to small
>>>>> changes in syntax since the DDLm draft document was produced.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is not trivial to produce a CIF2 version that is fundamentally
>>>>> unfriendly to DDLm and dREL, given that DDLm and dREL operate at a
>>>>> semantic level and we are producing a syntax document. �Only if our
>>>>> CIF2 syntax were to produce a different infoset (abstract
>>>>> datastructure) could some of the concepts in DDLm and dREL become
>>>>> poorly specified.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Bollinger, John C
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Friday, January 14, 2011 2:30 PM, Herbert J. Bernstein wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> � I would suggest recalling that this CIF2 exercise began with
>>>>>>> tryin to define a DDLm/dREL-friendly version of CIF. �To the best
>>>>>>> of my knowledge, the current DDLm spec is at what is published
>>>>>>> on the IUCr web site under http://www.iucr.org/resources/cif/ddl/ddlm
>>>>>>> with draft documents from August 2008. �I propose that we all
>>>>>>> take the time to review those documents and make a conscious
>>>>>>> effort to decide if we wish to make use of them as a
>>>>>>> base for CIF2 or not. �They contain many points relevant
>>>>>>> to the current discussion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is an eminently reasonable suggestion, and I have endeavored to
>>>>>> take
>>>>>> it. �I find I need more time to formulate the results of my analysis,
>>>>>> but
>>>>>> they do not lead me to the same conclusion that Herbert has reached,
>>>>>> that we
>>>>>> should start over from scratch. �However, we can, perhaps, consider
>>>>>> each of
>>>>>> the changes in our current draft, as Herbert prodded us to do, and
>>>>>> evaluate
>>>>>> them against this group's mandate and objectives. �We might now draw
>>>>>> different conclusions about some of them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I decline to work on this over the weekend, and Monday is a U.S.
>>>>>> holiday,
>>>>>> so it will be at least Tuesday before a I respond more fully.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> John C. Bollinger, Ph.D.
>>>>>> Department of Structural Biology
>>>>>> St. Jude Children's Research Hospital
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Email Disclaimer: �www.stjude.org/emaildisclaimer
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> ddlm-group mailing list
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> T +61 (02) 9717 9907
>>>>> F +61 (02) 9717 3145
>>>>> M +61 (04) 0249 4148
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> ddlm-group mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> ddlm-group mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> T +61 (02) 9717 9907
>>> F +61 (02) 9717 3145
>>> M +61 (04) 0249 4148
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ddlm-group mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ddlm-group mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> T +61 (02) 9717 9907
> F +61 (02) 9717 3145
> M +61 (04) 0249 4148
> _______________________________________________
> ddlm-group mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group
>
_______________________________________________ ddlm-group mailing list [email protected] http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group
Reply to: [list | sender only]
- References:
- [ddlm-group] Simon's elide proposal (James Hester)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Relationship asmong CIF2, STAR,CIF1 and Python. . (Bollinger, John C)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Relationship asmong CIF2, STAR,CIF1 and Python. . (SIMON WESTRIP)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Relationship asmong CIF2, STAR, CIF1 and Python. . (James Hester)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Relationship asmong CIF2, STAR, CIF1 and Python. . (Herbert J. Bernstein)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Relationship asmong CIF2, STAR, CIF1 and Python. . (James Hester)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Relationship asmong CIF2, STAR, CIF1 and Python. . (Herbert J. Bernstein)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Relationship asmong CIF2, STAR,CIF1 and Python. . . . (Bollinger, John C)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Relationship asmong CIF2, STAR,CIF1 and Python. . . . (Herbert J. Bernstein)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Relationship asmong CIF2, STAR,CIF1 and Python. . . .. . (Bollinger, John C)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Relationship asmong CIF2, STAR,CIF1 and Python. . . .. . (James Hester)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Relationship asmong CIF2, STAR,CIF1 and Python. . . .. . (Herbert J. Bernstein)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Relationship asmong CIF2, STAR,CIF1 and Python. . . .. . (James Hester)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Relationship asmong CIF2, STAR,CIF1 and Python. . . .. . (Herbert J. Bernstein)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Relationship asmong CIF2, STAR,CIF1 and Python. . . .. . (James Hester)
- Prev by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] Simon's elide proposal
- Next by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] Relationship asmong CIF2, STAR, CIF1 and Python. .
- Prev by thread: Re: [ddlm-group] Relationship asmong CIF2, STAR,CIF1 and Python. . . .. .
- Next by thread: Re: [ddlm-group] Relationship asmong CIF2, STAR,CIF1 and Python. . . .. .. .
- Index(es):

